These items were requested by Forest Access For All, and denied by the Forest Supervisor Tom Montoya and Regional Forester Jim Pena. We will discuss what this means below the listed items.
Response Letter from Regional Forester – 12_27_17_No_Response_FOIA_Response
Information requested on –
1) Blue Mountains Forest Plan
a) We would like a list of the people and groups that have standing to object to the
Blue Mountain Forest Plan Revision
b) We would like a list of all changes currently made to the Blue Mountain Forest
c) We would like a copy of all new alternatives developed after the comment period
d) What is the expected date the final EIS will be released?
e) If any specialist reports were produced for the Blue Mountain Forest Plan
Revision, we would like a copy of these.
2) Travel Management Plan (Sub-part A)
a) We would like copies of any specialist reports used in developing Sub-part A.
b) We would like a copy of all public meeting notes taken for input on roads needed
in Baker, Union, Wallowa, and Grant Counties for the Sub-part A report.
3) Blue Mountain Resiliency Project
a) We would like the individual treatment areas identified on the Wallowa Whitman,
Ochoco and Umatilla National Forest.
b) How many meetings have been held and county commissions/courts on
development of the targeted treatment areas?
c) We would like a copy of notes taken at the meetings, if any have occurred.
What this means to you as a user of the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest
- The agency has no clue as to who has standing for submitting comments on the Forest Plan Revision, or at least doesn’t admit to who has standing in an attempt to limit objections to the revision. (Fortunately for you, we do know who has standing, and have developed a list of people to work with on writing and submitting objections when the Final EIS is released, please be watching for workshops this spring).
- The forest service is unwilling to give an open and transparent process to the development of changes to the forest plan revision, what changes have been made since comments were submitted, or what possible alternatives have been developed from our over 500 individual commentors.
- No specialist reports were generated for the development of the Sub-part A Travel Analysis Report, which means limited to no analysis was completed on determining which roads were “likely needed” and which roads were “likely not needed.”
- There has been no individual discussions with county governments on proposed treatments on the Blue Mountains Resiliency Project, and the forest service is currently developing those plans in a vacuum, contrary to what the propaganda machine at the Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National Forest say.
All in all, it means they are still not listening, and they are still hell bent on locking us all out of the mountains of Eastern Oregon under the disguise of “protecting the people.” This has nothing to do with protecting our communities, it has to do with Mr. Pena and his friends seeing our forest managed as “preserves” and not as working lands.